134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25308097)
1. Simulating the effect of input errors on the accuracy of Tofts' pharmacokinetic model parameters.
Lavini C
Magn Reson Imaging; 2015 Feb; 33(2):222-35. PubMed ID: 25308097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Relative sensitivities of DCE-MRI pharmacokinetic parameters to arterial input function (AIF) scaling.
Li X; Cai Y; Moloney B; Chen Y; Huang W; Woods M; Coakley FV; Rooney WD; Garzotto MG; Springer CS
J Magn Reson; 2016 Aug; 269():104-112. PubMed ID: 27288764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. DCE-MRI protocol for constraining absolute pharmacokinetic modeling errors within specific accuracy limits.
Knight SP; Meaney JF; Fagan AJ
Med Phys; 2019 Aug; 46(8):3592-3602. PubMed ID: 31148187
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. DUSTER: dynamic contrast enhance up-sampled temporal resolution analysis method.
Liberman G; Louzoun Y; Artzi M; Nadav G; Ewing JR; Ben Bashat D
Magn Reson Imaging; 2016 May; 34(4):442-50. PubMed ID: 26708030
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Repeatability of arterial input functions and kinetic parameters in muscle obtained by dynamic contrast enhanced MR imaging of the head and neck.
Koopman T; Martens RM; Lavini C; Yaqub M; Castelijns JA; Boellaard R; Marcus JT
Magn Reson Imaging; 2020 May; 68():1-8. PubMed ID: 31978517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the patellar bone: How to quantify perfusion.
Poot DHJ; van der Heijden RA; van Middelkoop M; Oei EHG; Klein S
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2018 Mar; 47(3):848-858. PubMed ID: 28707311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Investigation and optimization of parameter accuracy in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.
Cheng HL
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2008 Sep; 28(3):736-43. PubMed ID: 18777534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Improved correlation to quantitative DCE-MRI pharmacokinetic parameters using a modified initial area under the uptake curve (mIAUC) approach.
Cheng HL
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2009 Oct; 30(4):864-72. PubMed ID: 19787732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy and precision of quantitative DCE-MRI parameters: How should one estimate contrast concentration?
Wake N; Chandarana H; Rusinek H; Fujimoto K; Moy L; Sodickson DK; Kim SG
Magn Reson Imaging; 2018 Oct; 52():16-23. PubMed ID: 29777820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reproducibility of the aortic input function (AIF) derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) of the kidneys in a volunteer study.
Mendichovszky IA; Cutajar M; Gordon I
Eur J Radiol; 2009 Sep; 71(3):576-81. PubMed ID: 19004588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Blind deconvolution estimation of an arterial input function for small animal DCE-MRI.
Jiřík R; Taxt T; Macíček O; Bartoš M; Kratochvíla J; Souček K; Dražanová E; Krátká L; Hampl A; Starčuk Z
Magn Reson Imaging; 2019 Oct; 62():46-56. PubMed ID: 31150814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The arterial input function: Spatial dependence within the imaging volume and its influence on 3D quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for head and neck cancer.
Roberts J; Kim SE; Kholmovski EG; Hitchcock Y; Richards TJ; Anzai Y
Magn Reson Imaging; 2023 Sep; 101():40-46. PubMed ID: 37030177
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Quantifying dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the knee in children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis using an arterial input function (AIF) extracted from popliteal artery enhancement, and the effect of the choice of the AIF on the kinetic parameters.
Workie DW; Dardzinski BJ
Magn Reson Med; 2005 Sep; 54(3):560-8. PubMed ID: 16088875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. T2*-correction in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI from double-echo acquisitions.
Kleppestø M; Larsson C; Groote I; Salo R; Vardal J; Courivaud F; Bjørnerud A
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2014 May; 39(5):1314-9. PubMed ID: 24123598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A simulation study comparing nine mathematical models of arterial input function for dynamic contrast enhanced MRI to the Parker model.
He D; Xu L; Qian W; Clarke J; Fan X
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2018 Jun; 41(2):507-518. PubMed ID: 29569210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An analysis of the pharmacokinetic parameter ratios in DCE-MRI using the reference region model.
Lee J; Platt S; Kent M; Zhao Q
Magn Reson Imaging; 2012 Jan; 30(1):26-35. PubMed ID: 22071409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Pharmacokinetic modeling of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI using a reference region and input function tail.
Ahmed Z; Levesque IR
Magn Reson Med; 2020 Jan; 83(1):286-298. PubMed ID: 31393033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of model-based arterial input functions for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in tumor bearing rats.
McGrath DM; Bradley DP; Tessier JL; Lacey T; Taylor CJ; Parker GJ
Magn Reson Med; 2009 May; 61(5):1173-84. PubMed ID: 19253360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Estimating the arterial input function from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI data with compensation for flow enhancement (II): Applications in spine diagnostics and assessment of crohn's disease.
van Schie JJN; Lavini C; van Vliet LJ; Kramer G; Pieters-van den Bos I; Marcus JT; Stoker J; Vos FM
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2018 May; 47(5):1197-1204. PubMed ID: 29193469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Reproducibility of the gadolinium concentration measurements and of the fitting parameters of the vascular input function in the superior sagittal sinus in a patient population.
Lavini C; Verhoeff JJ
Magn Reson Imaging; 2010 Dec; 28(10):1420-30. PubMed ID: 20817379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
